From: John McWilliams on
David J Taylor wrote:
> ray wrote:
> []
>> Since, as I understand it, a RAW file is basically a dump of the
>> sensor data, you can't do any better than that. Theoretical
>> limitations are one thing - practical applications are another.
>
> However, the simple statement that "RAW is 12-bit and JPEG is 8-bit, so
> JPEG can't have the same dynamic range" is incorrect, and that's what the
> maths showed.


I certainly never said nor implied the above! What I said was:

The dynamic range of a JPEG cannot be greater than the RAW file from
which it's produced, unless it's a matter of poor processing of said RAW.

--
John McWilliams
From: David J Taylor on
John McWilliams wrote:
> David J Taylor wrote:
>> ray wrote:
>> []
>>> Since, as I understand it, a RAW file is basically a dump of the
>>> sensor data, you can't do any better than that. Theoretical
>>> limitations are one thing - practical applications are another.
>>
>> However, the simple statement that "RAW is 12-bit and JPEG is 8-bit,
>> so JPEG can't have the same dynamic range" is incorrect, and that's
>> what the maths showed.
>
>
> I certainly never said nor implied the above! What I said was:
>
> The dynamic range of a JPEG cannot be greater than the RAW file from
> which it's produced, unless it's a matter of poor processing of said
> RAW.

John,

I agree.

It was "ray" who said: "If you shoot jpeg, you have 8 bits of dynamic
range (in each RGB component) - that's it - because that's all the
camera's jpeg format will support. If you shoot raw you'll have 12 bits or
more."

Cheers,
David


From: ray on
On Mon, 01 Sep 2008 18:26:31 +0000, David J Taylor wrote:

> John McWilliams wrote:
>> David J Taylor wrote:
>>> ray wrote:
>>> []
>>>> Since, as I understand it, a RAW file is basically a dump of the
>>>> sensor data, you can't do any better than that. Theoretical
>>>> limitations are one thing - practical applications are another.
>>>
>>> However, the simple statement that "RAW is 12-bit and JPEG is 8-bit,
>>> so JPEG can't have the same dynamic range" is incorrect, and that's
>>> what the maths showed.
>>
>>
>> I certainly never said nor implied the above! What I said was:
>>
>> The dynamic range of a JPEG cannot be greater than the RAW file from
>> which it's produced, unless it's a matter of poor processing of said
>> RAW.
>
> John,
>
> I agree.
>
> It was "ray" who said: "If you shoot jpeg, you have 8 bits of dynamic
> range (in each RGB component) - that's it - because that's all the
> camera's jpeg format will support. If you shoot raw you'll have 12 bits
> or more."
>
> Cheers,
> David

OK, so you've attempted to show why (theoretically) I was wrong. That
still does not prove that the jpeg has more information than the RAW data
from which it was derived. Theoretical limitations are one thing -
practical applications are another.
From: David J Taylor on
ray wrote:
[]
> OK, so you've attempted to show why (theoretically) I was wrong. That
> still does not prove that the jpeg has more information than the RAW
> data from which it was derived. Theoretical limitations are one thing
> - practical applications are another.

Ray,

I'm not saying that JPEG has any more information, simply that because of
the gamma-correction which is typically used in JPEGs the dynamic range of
the image is not restricted compared to RAW. The precision is less,
though, and the RAW data will be best for post-processing.

However, the Fuji F100fd does not offer RAW as a file saving format as far
as I can see.

http://www.fujifilm.co.uk/consumer/digital/digital-cameras/advanced-compact/finepix-f100fd-119591/Specs

Cheers,
David


From: ray on
On Tue, 02 Sep 2008 06:08:23 +0000, David J Taylor wrote:

> ray wrote:
> []
>> OK, so you've attempted to show why (theoretically) I was wrong. That
>> still does not prove that the jpeg has more information than the RAW
>> data from which it was derived. Theoretical limitations are one thing -
>> practical applications are another.
>
> Ray,
>
> I'm not saying that JPEG has any more information, simply that because
> of the gamma-correction which is typically used in JPEGs the dynamic
> range of the image is not restricted compared to RAW. The precision is
> less, though, and the RAW data will be best for post-processing.
>
> However, the Fuji F100fd does not offer RAW as a file saving format as
> far as I can see.
>
> http://www.fujifilm.co.uk/consumer/digital/digital-cameras/advanced-
compact/finepix-f100fd-119591/Specs
>
> Cheers,
> David

Precisely why I suggested the OP check the Kodak online store for a Kodak
P series which does.